This invention relates to sockets and the tools used therewith.
The first consideration given to the construction of an adjustable socket is the understanding of the forces that are imposed on the tool. Because the socket is split from a single round part to two or more pieces, the tool is inheritably weaker.
In applying torque to the adjustable socket when it is engaged with a bolt, the jaws are cammed outward in trying to override the high points of the hexagonal bolt head. In being held by the adjust screw, which allows rotation, the outward motion translates to a twist. The twisting motion is either clockwise or counter-clockwise. After all the play between the mating threads of jaws and adjust screw has been taken up, additional torque will damage the threads and bend the screw, the weaker to be first.
Such practice is found in U.S. Pat. No. 1,612,713. To overcome this problem, the jaws or extensions of the jaws should be guided over an adequate distance, for if not, the guiding body will be wedged apart by the leverage of the jaws themselves as is forseen to happen in U.S. Pat. No, 1,046,216.
If only one jaw is provided with a supporting and guiding extension, and the other jaw is constructed to receive the extension, then the required length of the extension will project outside the body of the other jaw by an objectionable distance, which is the longest when the jaws are turning the smallest bolt. This forms the second consideration, which is that the turning clearance of the socket should be kept to a minimum.
In machinery and automotive design, only small clearances are given around nuts, bolts, screws and other hardware. From this it is learned that expansion features should ideally be shared by both jaw members. The prior art such as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 1,456,290 and 1,621,264 involve this drawback.